Warriors / Rockets Preview Thread

Viggy: Greetings, Chris. It has been 205-and-change days since the Warriors opened the season with a loss to the Rockets; now, the two teams square up in the Western Conference Finals with a spot in the NBA Finals at stake. Can I start by saying…it’s about damn time!

Chris: It already seems more than a match-up of two good teams. It’s already previewing itself as a match-up of two deliberately contrasting styles of play and temperament.

Viggy: Indeed. The Dubs and Rockets are analytically minded teams that have approached the exploitation of inefficiencies in the NBA in very different ways. For both teams, the maxims “3 > 2” and “close range 2s > mid-to-long-range 2s” apply; however, the Warriors have such elite jump shooting talent that, against a league that desperately wants to chase them off the line, they are “settling” (in the loosest sense of the word) for midrange 2s while also continuing to rain fire from deep, with both types of shots coming from selfless screen setting and constant off-the-ball motion. Meanwhile, the Rockets are arguably the most lethal isolation team in history, and they also subscribe to the maxim “free throws > everything else”. By flanking James Harden and Chris Paul with a bevy of shooters to space the floor and letting them go to work (with all the shenanigans that entails), they’ve unlocked a whole new gear this season on their way to the number 1 overall seed in the NBA. It may not be “pretty,” but it sure as heck is effective.

Chris: And as I like to frame it (melodramatically): good guys (ball movement) vs. bad guys (ball hoggery). I thought I was making up “hoggery,” but I just looked it up…

Viggy: Amen to that…as my coworker (a longtime Rockets fan) puts it, he’ll root for the team, but the antics (the flopping, the whining, the preening) drive him insane. For that, among many other reasons, I really hope the Warriors win.

Chris: About “the maxims 3 > 2 and close range 2s > mid-to-long-range 2s”…as Kerr pointed out today, Chris Paul has been breaking that Houston rule himself lately. Paul’s midrange game (often when Gobert was switched out onto him) was often decisive against Utah.

Viggy: Totally. I think, as the Warriors have learned over countless postseason games over the last few years, the playoffs are a totally different beast from the regular season, in terms of scheduling, game planning, execution, and officiating. The Rockets have historically struggled to adapt, but they’ve stockpiled a bevy of seasoned vets and youngsters who don’t know any better, and they dare to dream that this might be the year. Let’s talk a little bit about matchups, because there are a number of intriguing subplots to what should be a fantastic series. My first question: how do the Warriors match up against the expected Rockets starters (James Harden, Chris Paul, Clint Capela, PJ Tucker, and Trevor Ariza)?

Chris: Aha! (“How do the Warriors match up against the expected Rockets starters?”) I submit, Viggy, that’s a kind of expectedly trap wrong question!

The Rockets begin every damn possession they can by trying to force a switch in match-ups right from the get-go. They hunt your worst defender, have his man screen for Harden, and only then begin to run their offense—with Harden (or Paul) massaging the ball and looking to break down the weakest on-ball defender they can force you to switch onto Harden (or Paul). And everything then commences from there.

So I submit that initial match-ups (in a possession) matter far less than the fluid way your whole 5-man defense can counter-punch actively what the Rockets are up to.

Viggy: Ah, the perfect segue 🙂 yes indeed, it truly matters little who “guards” who until the Rockets get the switches they are hunting for. Given those constraints, what lineup do you think has the best chance at being able to “counter-punch” effectively? And, if that lineup is what I think you think it is, does Steve Kerr roll it out from the opening tip, or is there a placeholder that can be reasonably effective until it comes time to play the trump card?

Chris: I found it very interesting that Kerr auditioned Jordan Bell with 4 minutes left in the 3rd quarter of Game 5 against the Pelicans. Center play defensively is critical. Not so much for matching up in a one-on-one sense vs. Capela, but rather by having a defensive amoeba-lineup on the court that can switch, rotate, get out on 3’s, and, yes, anticipate and defend lobs to Capela. Anyone laterally challenged Houston will hunt. Anyone who can’t fly out to a corner and then get back into the paint (and vice versa). Obviously there’s the Hamptons 5. And Looney and Livingston, and, who knows…maybe Bell getting some of David West’s minutes?

Viggy: I think it’s going to be a huge series for the likes of Looney and Bell (and maybe JaVale, who will at least give as good as he gets), and definitely not the ideal sort of matchup for the likes of Zaza Pachulia and even David West.

Chris: I agree that JaVale will get a look. His problem won’t be against Capela, but when Houston can force him to switch out on Harden or Paul. You don’t have to be a low post defender against Capela. You have to defensively run the hell out of the floor against him. You have to screen him off. And, yes, you need the athleticism to compete against lobs to him—but even more you need to “read” the timing for when to play the lob and when to meet Harden or Paul at the rim. JaVale and Bell have the athleticism. But Looney and Draymond the ability to “read” the situations.

Viggy: In addition to that, Draymond and Looney are significantly less likely to commit the kinds of fouls that are a staple of the Houston offense, even (especially?) when chasing smaller guards and wings out along the perimeter.

Chris: Looney’s an incredibly disciplined defender—as is the freer-spirited Draymond. And the W’s will need all the stern self-discipline they can muster (from everyone) to stay vertical and not reach-in and break the plane of verticality against Harden.

But Houston’s never faced a defensive team like the one they’ll begin facing on Monday.

Viggy: I read online that this season, the Warriors have limited The Beard to roughly 6 free throw attempts a game in their head-to-head matchups, which is a minor miracle in and of itself. If that kind of focus and discipline holds up over the series, the Dubs should be in business. Let’s shift gears now and talk about what the Warriors will be able to do against Houston. What are you expecting from the Warriors on offense, and how do you expect Houston to try to discombobulate them?

Chris: I don’t think Houston can discombobulate the W’s offense. I think Houston’s offense will feed the W’s offense. Houston’s doing things that D’Antoni’s teams typically never do: (1) Slow tempo; and (2) defend. But Houston has to make (not just take) 3s. And the W’s need to rush, close-out, and defend those same damn 3s. Because when (not if) Houston misses 3s, the W’s win run the ball back down Houston’s throat for transition-3s of their own. And nobody shoots transition 3s like Klay and Steph (and soon KD again). Houston will try to slow tempo by drawing fouls and massaging the ball in the halfcourt. But when they burp up missed 3s, their attempt at slowing tempo ends.

Viggy: One of the exploitable weaknesses of these Rockets is exactly that – their plans A, B, and C are all predicated around burping up a high volume of 3s; and while there are other nuances (like Chris Paul’s “old-fashioned” midrange game and Capela lobs), most of these are side effects of the 3 point barrage. In the few Rockets games I’ve seen this season, when the 3s go down, they look unstoppable. But the phrase “regression to the mean” has real legs, and when the 3s stop going down, teams can make moves on them. If you weather the storm, there are opportunities to get back at Houston, and I think the Warriors are uniquely equipped to match Houston’s 3 point shooting (and then some).

Another interesting subplot here is the notion of playoff pressure. I think that historically, many of the narratives around “clutch” play in the NBA playoffs are manufactured and overblown, since it has been statistically proven that every medium-to-high-usage player’s stats suffer a decline when the postseason comes around and it is hard to individually pick out a player amidst all the confounding variables and insist “he choked”. However, that isn’t to say that the narratives don’t weigh on the players, and the Rockets led by two players who, fairly or unfairly, are regarded as shrinking violets in the big picture of the NBA playoffs. Moreover, for the first time in forever (since the last Mark Jackson-coached playoff series against the Clippers?), the Warriors are the underdog, which feels weird to even type! I’ve gotten so accustomed to the pressure of defending home court in the first two games of playoff series that watching the Dubs play in Houston next week is going to feel strange. That is yet another source of pressure that Houston will have to cope with, while the Warriors can go in knowing that (ideally) a Game 1 victory or (still very good) a split on the road puts even more pressure on a team that is trying desperately to exorcise playoff demons.

Chris: I’ve already made a big deal of Game 1 in our last post. I think if the W’s win Monday’s game decidedly they might break the frail wish-bone of the Rockets’ partly earned and partly self-manufactured “confidence.”

Kerr didn’t exactly say what I said above. (But Draymond probably is:) But Kerr did point out the surprising counter-intuitive “advantage” of not having home-court (at least when you’re as good as the W’s are).

Because if the W’s win Game 1 (and especially if they do so decidedly), in one mere 2 ½ hour stretch, they’ll have erased in one fell swoop the whole damn “advantage” that Houston’s spent 82 games groveling after.

Viggy: I can’t say that doesn’t feel extra satisfying, particularly given how raucously the Rockets celebrated (as I looked on from the stands!) on opening night this year. Let’s cut to the chase: who ya got, and in how many games? And what are your keys to the series, on both sides?

Chris: First, Viggy, even more importantly, how much does Swaggy P play (given that Kerr’s named him as one of the guys “who needs to stay ready”?

Viggy: I’d estimate no more than 5-10 minutes a game, if that 🙂 Swaggy might be out of his depth here.

Chris: Yeah, I’m finding myself wishing Patrick McCaw (or Casspi) was healthy and available this series. Maybe one more fleet long multi-purpose defender who’d sell-out rotating and chasing 3-point shooters would be ideal. I’m afraid both Quinn Cook and Nick Young are vulnerable to how Houston hunts a weak individual defender.

Viggy: Their absences will surely be felt; one of the reasons Steve Kerr had to play “roster Jenga” this season was injuries, particularly down the stretch. That being said, you’ve got to play cards with the hand you’ve been dealt, and who we’ve got are the horses we’re going to have to ride as far as they can take us.

Chris: I’m not so fond of “how many games?” (since each game instantly changes a series)—nor “keys to a series?” (I figure “keys” are like using a yellow marking-pen to highlight lines in a great novel: what you’re doing is excluding what you don’t mark).

But I’ll give you this…

I’ve already said that if the W’s break the Rockets’ frail wishbone in Game 1, the series could be shorter and less competitive than most think.

And one key…character.

Viggy: I like the highlighter analogy, and I’ll myself avoid doing out keys to the series, other than the critical one you’ve mentioned. But I will go out on a limb and say Warriors in 5 or 6. To be frank, I wouldn’t be astonished if the Rockets pulled out this series. We haven’t really talked about it a lot in this post, but the Dubs have been maddeningly inconsistent this season, and their boredom has even extended to the playoffs, where they’ve interspersed listless, rudderless play with some of their finest basketball. Those kinds of momentum swings are risky in the postseason, particularly against a hungry, motivated opponent. That being said, the Warriors have Stephen Curry, Klay Thompson, Kevin Durant, Draymond Green, and Steve Kerr; there isn’t a more proven batch of winners anywhere in the modern NBA. Dubs over Rockets.

Chris: Yep, you, I, and Robert each share that concern about how the W’s can suddenly lose focus. But I doubt they do so now. Just as Houston’s gotten what it’s wanted (a tiger by the tail), so too have the W’s (another finals appearance right in front of them with a particularly noxious “pretender” standing in their path.) I’m imagining the W’s plunge from a 3-1 lead against the Cavs in 2016 being a particularly efficacious teacher now!

Viggy: Oof, that brings back some not-so-fond memories. One of the “nits” that those who dislike the Warriors tend to pick on is the fact that they “haven’t beaten the best of the best” enroute to their two championships in three years; this year presents a golden opportunity to upend that narrative (however unfair) entirely.

Chris: You can only beat who shows up. And, like you say, Viggy, happily the Rockets have shown up now.